The investigator tasked with collecting and processing key video evidence showing the fatal arrest of Abdirahman Abdi had no recent computer training, and made “critical errors” that went uncorrected in reports he filed during the investigation of Const. Daniel Montsion, the Ottawa police officer’s defence team argued Wednesday.

Michael Edelson hammered away at Special Investigations Unit investigator David Robinson on the witness stand until Edelson complained his cross-examination could go no further, as the defence still awaits further disclosure from the Crown’s first witness.

Robinson met three times with Crown prosecutors Philip Perlmutter and Roger Shallow through January and February to prepare for the approaching trial, with each meeting lasting between four and seven hours, the veteran investigator testified.

Edelson said Robinson’s notes from those meetings still had not been disclosed to the defence.

When Perlmutter objected to Edelson asking the witness any specifics of what he discussed with the Crown during his trial preparation meetings, saying it comes “close to crossing the line,” Edelson was quick to respond.

“This meeting (on Feb. 3) is where we hear about new evidence for the first time. It’s a game-changer with respect to this case,” Edelson said.

That new evidence arrived on the eve of trial in the form of a two-minute excerpt of CCTV surveillance video taken from the scene of the incident at 55 Hilda St., which the defence alleges was shown to a leading forensic pathologist in November 2016, who then changed his mind from ruling Abdi’s death an accident to ruling it a homicide.

The SIU later charged Montsion with manslaughter, aggravated assault and assault with a weapon. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

On Wednesday court heard about another version of the video that was shown by investigators to the pathologist, Dr. Christopher Milroy, this time at The Ottawa Hospital on July 26, 2016, the day he performed Abdi’s autopsy.

Robinson testified he and two other SIU investigators met with Milroy and screened the full 28-minute version of the video he had extracted and converted to a DVD the night before.

Robinson told court he had “difficulties” with the task, and was unable to capture the multi-layered video file, which came with its own proprietary software required to play back the video, which was captured by multiple surveillance cameras around the building.

Robinson told court he was “self-taught” when Edelson pointed out he had no computer training in the last 15 years listed on his c.v., which contained “no indication” of forensic computer courses before or after Robinson’s retirement from Durham Regional Police, where he served 32 years on the force, including 14 years in forensics investigations. He joined the SIU in May, 2012.

Robinson testified he was handed a thumb drive within 20 minutes of arriving at the crime scene, and was told by fellow SIU investigator Ralph Mahar it contained “security video.”

Edelson questioned why investigators took only a copy of the files instead of seizing the entire digital video recording device, or removing the hard drive to “preserve the evidence.”

Defence lawyer Solomon Friedman had previously suggested the video clips used by SIU investigators were “corrupt files” created during the export of the original video files.

Under cross-examination, Robinson said he didn’t know who gave Mahar the thumb drive, or if it was the only thumb drive made or given out that day, or whether the contents of the drive had been tampered with.

After several failed attempts at converting the files he tried another method, using software called “Snagit” to make a copy of what was playing onscreen.

It was that “screen capture” version that was played for Milroy during the next morning’s briefing as Robinson was also tasked with documenting the autopsy.

Days later, back at SIU headquarters in Mississauga to process the evidence he collected, Robinson sent an email to Mahar that identified the wrong officer as having a baton stained with blood, Edelson said.

Both Montsion and fellow Const. Dave Weir were subjects of the SIU investigation, though Weir was not charged.

Edelson called it a “critical error” when Robinson’s email mistakenly identified Montsion’s baton as having bloodstains. Court heard it was actually Weir’s baton that was marked with blood.

Robinson testified he corrected himself verbally to his fellow investigator the next day, but Edelson noted there was no record of that, saying the investigator allowed a “misrepresentation of evidence to stay on the record without correction.”

“I didn’t see it as a critical error,” Robinson replied. “It was a typo. I switched the names.”

Edelson then notified Justice Robert Kelly he could go no further without receiving the disclosure they had requested from Robinson. Some of that material was disclosed over the lunch break Wednesday, with the Crown promising more on the way.

“We cannot go on like this, receiving disclosure the morning of or the day of the trial,” Edelson said, pledging to start Thursday’s proceedings by producing the stack of letters requesting disclosure they’ve filed over the last two years.

He said the defence will seek a disclosure order from the judge, if necessary.

This Week's Flyers

Comments

Postmedia is pleased to bring you a new commenting experience. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information.